You mentioned that you wanted to be able to see it when you view the
source - is that important? Because you wont *see* the span element but
the browser will. (I imagine you are doing this for an image replacement
technique in which case not seeing it wouldn't be a big issue). Remember
you
On 11/2/05, James Gollan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
You mentioned that you wanted to be able to see it when you view the
source - is that important? Because you wont *see* the span element but
the browser will. (I imagine you are doing this for an image replacement
technique in which case not
thanks for all the brillant feedback!
I will try putting a page or two through a screen reader for them.
Also I will show them how much easier it is to do a redesign with
a standards based website as they do this quite a bit.
On top of that a lot of thier contracts specify accesibility as a
James Gollan skrev:
You mentioned that you wanted to be able to see it when you view the
source - is that important?
http://jennifermadden.com/scripts/ViewRenderedSource.html
FF extension to see the rendered source !
/AndersN
**
The
I completely dooced the onload. If you're using one of the infamous
addEvent methods, you could just do this:
addEvent(window,'load',insertSpan);
Dustin
On 11/2/05, Anders Nawroth [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
James Gollan skrev:
You mentioned that you wanted to be able to see it when you view
Why are the ul and li styles so different from IE to Firefox?
http://www.kustom.com/092005/support/productreviews.asp
Also there is a 2 pixel difference in the width of the container, you can see
the difference by going from IE to Firefox. This hiccup in IE, is this the box
model hack?
[EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
How do you fix this easily sitewide?
IE *is* using the IE box model. Your page is in quirks mode due to the
blank line(s) before the DTD. However, your issues seem to stem, not from
being in quirks mode but, from having a mixture of external CSS, inline
CSS, center and
I know this is a topic that often
comes back to the list. Well, it comes back
again.
I'm having some troubles when trying to think how headings should be
used, and I'm always thinking about simplify the site structure, but
that simplification always seems to mean "strip out content".
Summary
I had this fixed but it seems to be backlook at formhttp://65.36.226.10/content/contact.cfmany suggestions?tia
Hi Julián,
H1 should
only be used once, generally as your page title. In the detail view of an
article the article's titleshould be an H1,unless your article pages
always carry the parent title of e.g. News, in which case you would use H2 or
lower.
H2 headings and
lower can be used
Tia,
Can u be more specific? Apart from the interminable load
time the page and form both look good. Very pretty
layout.
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
csslistSent: Thursday, 3 November 2005 9:50 AMTo:
wsg@webstandardsgroup.orgSubject: [WSG] color
Hi,
Im trying to implement a similar thing to Google
suggest but have found that the browsers default autocomplete gets in
the way.
The only way Ive found to override this is to use the
non-standard autocomplete=off attribute of the input element.
This can be added by _javascript_ after
We have moved a lot into .net stuff while still keeping it css layout, and
although yes it did take time, our programmer now does this as normal
practice. So it is possible!! It does take more time and effort for the
programmer. You just have to make sure that they don't use the pre-built
.net
http://www.webstock.org.nz
Web Standards New Zealand is extremely pleased to announce the launch of
Webstock - a web experience and conference - to be held 23-23 May 2006
in Wellington, New Zealand.
Among the speakers are Kelly Goto, Doug Bowman (who both spoke at Web
Essentials), Ben
Focas, Grant said:
Alternatively -does anyone know of a method to disable the autocomplete
in a standards-based way?
Isn't google suggest (and it's ilk) a javascript solution anyway?
Manipulatling an attribute with javascript (even a non-standard one) so it
doesn't interfere with your other
Do you mean it's getting chopped off? What's it meant to
look like?
I'm getting scroll bars in IE6 and can access the entire
form.
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
csslistSent: Thursday, 3 November 2005 11:13 AMTo:
wsg@webstandardsgroup.orgSubject: RE:
this is how it is supposed to look, see how there isnt any color above the feildset border.http://www.jamwerx.com/form2.png (on ff mac)where as this one, there is some grey extending up over border towards the top (on ie6 pc)http://www.jamwerx.com/form1.jpgthe form works just there is now some
Ah, I see. The background PNG is extending outside the
border of the fieldset. Bizarro.
Have you tried setting a background colour to see if it
does the same? If not, then the problem lies with the background
image.
Try setting a value for background-position: top
left.
From: [EMAIL
csslist wrote:
this is how it is supposed to look, see how there isnt any color
above the feildset border.
http://www.jamwerx.com/form2.png (on ff mac)
where as this one, there is some grey extending up over border
towards the top (on ie6 pc)
http://www.jamwerx.com/form1.jpg
the form
Terrance Wood said:
Manipulating an attribute with javascript (even a non-standard one) so
it
doesn't interfere with your other javascript functionality sounds like
the
ideal solution to me.
Yes, but what purpose - if any - is served by hiding a non-html standard
attribute. It's still there
yeah there is a bg color the png only goes half way down.it was working thats the weird thingFrom: "Paul Noone" [EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Wednesday, November 02, 2005 8:06 PMTo: wsg@webstandardsgroup.orgSubject: RE: [WSG] color overflow in pc ie fieldset Ah, I see. The background PNG is extending
i tried that and it got really weird!!!From: "Thierry Koblentz" [EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Wednesday, November 02, 2005 8:14 PMTo: wsg@webstandardsgroup.orgSubject: Re: [WSG] color overflow in pc ie fieldsetcsslist wrote: this is how it is supposed to look, see how there isnt any color above the
Focas, Grant wrote:
Yes, but what purpose - if any - is served by hiding a non-html standard
attribute. It's still there isn't it? I suspect there may be a reason to
do this beyond the warm inner glow of validation. But I can't see it. At
the moment it feels like merely tricking the validator
Hi there,
One reason there is so much debate is the HTML 4.01 spec actually
whimps out of making a call ;) In other words, it doesn't actually say
if skipping a level is wrong; it just says some people think it's
wrong.
What the spec DOES say is that the headings are ordered from 1 to 6 in
order
There's nothing wrong with:
h1My site titleh1
...navigation...
h2My section name/h2
h3Latest Articles/h3
h4Article 1 Title/h4
pparagraph/p
h4Article 2 Title/h4
pparagraph/p
Another option is:
h1My site titleh1
...navigation...
h2My
I spoke with programmers today.
They were more receptive than i'd expected.
They agreed give standards a go by
easing into css based design one step at a time.
Tell those programmers we are ready for their questions. :-)
--
--
C Montoya
rdpdesign.com ... liquid.rdpdesign.com ...
Hi Julián,
SEMANTICS EXTRACTOR
Sometimes a view that approximates the semantics
of the content can be useful. Fortunately the W3C
have just such a tool:
http://www.w3.org/2003/12/semantic-extractor.html .
This will likely affirm Paul's point regarding an
h3 as a 'parent' to an h2 element
It does take more time and effort for the programmer.
Even after the learning process is completed?
big help-thanks
kvnmcwebn
**
The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/
See
28 matches
Mail list logo
